Physician Versus Nonphysician Instruction: Evaluating an Expert Curriculum-Competent Facilitator Model for Simulation-Based Central Venous Catheter Training.

INTRODUCTION: Healthcare simulation supports educational opportunities while maintaining patient safety. To reduce costs and increase the availability of training, a randomized controlled study evaluated central venous catheter (CVC) insertion training in the simulation laboratory with nonphysician competent facilitators (NPCFs) as instructors. METHOD: A group of learners naive to central line placement participated in a blended curriculum consisting of interactive online materials and simulation-based training. Learners were randomized to training with NPCFs or attending physician faculty. The primary outcome was simulated CVC insertion task performance, graded with a validated checklist by blinded physician reviewers. Learner knowledge and satisfaction were also evaluated. Analysis was conducted using noninferiority testing. RESULTS: Eighty-five students, 11 attending physicians, and 7 NPCFs voluntarily participated. Noninferiority testing of the difference in CVC insertion performance between NPCF-trained learners versus physician-trained learners found no significant difference [rejecting the null hypothesis of inferiority using an 8% noninferiority margin (P < 0.01)]. In addition, there was no difference found between the 2 groups on pre/post knowledge scores, self-reported learner comfort, course satisfaction, or instructor satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: An introductory CVC curriculum can be taught to novice learners by carefully trained and supported NPCFs and achieve skill and knowledge outcomes similar to learners taught by physicians.

Simulation: a teaching tool for liver transplantation anesthesiology.

Anesthesia for liver transplantation (ALT) requires extensive preparation and rapid recognition of changing clinical conditions. Owing to the proliferation of transplant centers, greater number of anesthesia providers need training in specific skills required to treat these patients. These cases are no longer limited to few transplant centers; therefore, reduction of cases in individual centers has created a need for simulation training to prepare and supplement clinical experience. We have developed an ALT simulation course for senior anesthesia residents which combines didactic sessions with live-patient-based and mannequin-based simulation. Outcomes have been measured using pre- and post-simulation course quizzes as well as a survey given at the end of the month-long ALT rotation. Twenty-four senior anesthesiology residents (n = 24) have completed the ALT simulation course. Residents had an average score of 75% ± 10% on the pre-simulation quiz, which increased to 92% ± 6.5% on the post-simulation quiz (p < 0.001). Furthermore, survey scores indicated that residents noted that the course provided an improvement in their preparedness, confidence, anticipation, and understanding of the importance of communication skills in the care of this patient population. The ALT simulation course provided a standardized in-depth exposure to clinical issues involved in the perioperative care of liver transplant patients.

Utilizing simulation technology for competency skills assessment and a comparison of traditional methods of training to simulation-based training.

BACKGROUND: The respiratory care department of one campus within our health system evaluated simulation-based medical education for training and competency evaluation of the mini bronchoalveolar lavage (mini-BAL) procedure, with an emphasis on patient safety and procedure performance standards. METHODS: Training and competency evaluation occurred in 4 phases. In phase one, 24 staff respiratory therapists (RTs) were randomly chosen and individually underwent a simulation-based test of their mini-BAL performance, using a patient-simulator mannequin. Their performance on this test reflected the effectiveness of traditional training methods. In phase two, 83 staff RTs were given unlimited access to a Web-based curriculum on mini-BAL, including a video of a mini-BAL. They then took 2 tests: one online Web-based test, then a patient-simulator test. In phase three, the same 83 RTs attended a workshop that used the patient simulator for training and practice, then were re-evaluated with the patient-simulator test. Phase four was another simulator-based re-evaluation, 90 days after phase three, to study skills retention. RESULTS: The mean scores were: phase one 73 +/- 10%, phase two 77 +/- 11%, phase three 95 +/- 5% (p < 0.01), phase four 92 +/- 8%. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that employing simulation technology within a comprehensive departmental program can enhance staff training.